Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Martin Hepp
<> wrote:
> Hi Dieter:
> There are several ontology repositories available on-line, but to my knowledge they all suffer from two serious limitations:
> 1. They do not rate ontologies by quality/relevance/popularity, so you do not get any hint whether foaf:Organization or foo:Organization will be the best way to expose your data.

Schemacache[1] used to order results by the number of documents
Sindice found it it, but this wasn't terribly effective; what we want
is  something more like "number of individual publishers using term X"
rather than "number of individual documents using term X".

I could work this out without too much difficulty from the VoID
descriptions published by CKAN[2] if more dataset descriptions listed
void:exampleResources  (around half of them don't), and if more VoID
dataset descriptions specified the dct:publisher and dct:creator of
the dataset, this would also be useful.

> 2. The selection of ontologies listed is, to say the best, often biased or partly a random choice. I do not know any repository that
> - has a broad coverage,
> - includes the top 25 linked data ontologies and
> - lists more non-toy ontologies than abandoned PhD project prototypes.
> The most useful tool for your purpose is likely

Schemacache used to be  rather  polluted with abandoned and toy
ontologies, but in November last year I started afresh with only the
namespaces registered on
The search results are now much more likely to be useful, though there
is still the odd bit of junk in there, and there is certainly room for


Received on Monday, 14 March 2011 13:39:33 UTC